Nevada Senator John Ensign says he has changed his mind over the years about campaign finance reform. He says he now favors ending all limits on campaign contributions as long as the giving is reported and the contributor identified.

Ensign says the problem with money and politics is that people find out ways to get around the law. He says he wants to remove all limits on contributions but make all of them reportable. In his words, "If you want to give one million-dollars to somebody, you give one million-dollars and they have to report it."

Ensign says he takes exception to critics who say there is too much money in politics. He says US beer companies spend more on advertising in a year than all the federal, state and local political races combined. He asked students at Reed High School in Sparks earlier this week, "What is more important, trying to persuade people on what beer they drink or trying to persuade people on who to elect to office?''

This is nothing like the usual whine by someone whose post was pulled. JimRob pulled my previous thread for a good reason. "If direct fund-raising were permitted on FR, it would soon be wall-to-wall fund-raising."

So, let's start again correctly. This is about civil disobedience to support the First Amendment and challenge the TERRIBLE CFR decision of the Supreme Court to uphold a terrible law passed by Congress and signed by President Bush.

All who are interested in an in-your-face challenge to the 30- and 60-day ad ban in the Campaign Finance "Reform" Act, please join in. The pattern is this: I'm looking for at least 1,000 people to help the effort. I will run the ad, and risk fines or jail time to make it work -- AND get national support.

But there should be NO mentions of money in this thread, and not in Freepmail either. This is JimRob's electronic home, and we should all abide his concerns.

Put your comments here. Click on the link above, and send me your e-mail addresses. I will get back to you by regular e-mail with the practical details.

This CAN be done. This SHOULD be done. But it MUST be done in accord with JimRob's guidelines.

Not really. It is after all a law, and laws can be voted out, if the pols. get enough pressure. As I've said before this IS an election year, that means the lads and lasses are going to be coming around looking for your support and vote. Grill em on this!

It's one thing to sit here and complain, it's another to actually DO something. remember it's the squeeky wheel that gets the grease.

7
posted on 01/15/2004 8:12:40 AM PST
by Valin
(We make a living by what we get, we make a life by what we give.)

The RNC was sending a letter Tuesday to the Federal Election Commission (news - web sites) urging it to reject a request by a Republican-leaning group for approval of its plan to spend such "soft money" on voter drives to help re-elect President Bush (news - web sites).

The nation's new campaign finance law, upheld last month by the Supreme Court, bars national party committees like the RNC from raising soft money for any purpose. It also includes a broad ban on the use of corporate, union and unlimited donations for federal election activity.

Several Democratic-leaning interest groups recently have sprung up to collect millions of dollars in soft money that their party can no longer raise, and many say their top priority is defeating President Bush. To counter those efforts, a group of Republicans is starting "Americans for a Better Country," and is asking the FEC whether it can use soft money for a range of partisan activities in the presidential race.

The RNC contends corporations and labor unions cannot spend treasury money on partisan get-out-the-vote efforts aimed at the public, whether they do it on their own or donate to outside groups carrying out such activities. The Republican committee says it also appears to be "legally problematic" for unlimited individual money to be used on partisan voter drives.

In a letter to Lawrence Norton, the election commission's general counsel, RNC attorney Charles Spies said that while the Republican committee is sympathetic to Americans for a Better Country's desire to re-elect Bush and maintain GOP leadership in Washington, it nonetheless was urging the commission to "carefully consider the implications" of ABC's request.

The RNC asked Democratic National Committee (news - web sites) Chairman Terry McAuliffe on Monday to join in signing the letter, and planned to wait until Tuesday afternoon for his response before sending its letter to the commission.

McAuliffe sent RNC Chairman Ed Gillespie a response letter Monday making his own request. He asked Gillespie to urge the FEC to force various Republican-leaning groups to identify their donors and to join him in calling for a commission investigation examining whether the Bush campaign was coordinating activities with groups run by a conservative activist. That would help "create an open and fair system," he wrote.

James Jordan, a spokesman for three of the Democratic soft-money groups, America Coming Together, the Media Fund and America Votes, said they have done nothing inappropriate.

"We firmly believe that all of our fund raising and spending practices are perfectly legal and appropriate, and have been so advised by counsel," Jordan said.

The FEC is expected to issue its decision on Americans for a Better Country's request next month.

Campaign finance watchdog groups including the Center for Responsive Politics, Democracy 21 and The Campaign Legal Center have asked the FEC to tell the Republican group it would be illegal for it to use corporate and union money for partisan get-out-the-vote efforts, noting that such a decision would also curtail the activities of many of the new anti-Bush groups.

The watchdog organizations said Monday they plan to pursue legal action against several of the soft money groups. Their top options include filing complaints with the FEC, which enforces federal campaign finance laws, or with the Internal Revenue Service (news - web sites), which oversees tax-exempt political groups.

The RNC was among several political players unsuccessfully suing to try to overturn the soft money ban, arguing it is unconstitutional.

9
posted on 01/15/2004 8:17:58 AM PST
by Valin
(We make a living by what we get, we make a life by what we give.)

I congratulate you on your optimism, but I don't share it. This law is too bad to ever be repealed or overturned, especially if you understand what purpose it actually serves. It wasn't written to get money out of politics as we've been told. It won't do that. What it does, and what it is intended to do, is to serve as an incumbent protection law for politicians. Why would they repeal that? Idealism? Get real.

1 Which section of the paper do you read first ? (If they answer the Editorial or Metro section, thank them for their time and move them on to the next house)

2 Can the Government solve most of our problems ? (If they answer yes, thank them for their time and move them on to the next house)

3 Have you ever attended the Hubert H. Humphrey Institute of Public Affairs ? (If yes, thank them for their time and move them on to the next house)

4 In thirty words or less, why are you running ?

5 Do you believe in limiting the growth of Government to the Personal Income Index ?

6 If you could have dinner with anyone who has ever lived, who would it be ? (Jesus and Ghandi are excluded)

7 What is the difference between Macro and Micro Economics ?

8 Other than Karl Marx, Name one economist.

9 If you have held a public office, how long have you served, and name your five best accomplishments.

10 In the early 1930s, when Winston Churchill warned Europe about Hitler and the German war machine, people thought that he was crazy. Would you let people think that you were crazy if you believe that you're right ?

Then what are you doing here? It's one thing to sit around and pi$$ and moan and complain that we're all going to hell in a handbasket, but it's another to try and do something to change it. That's what having a Republic is all about. Otherwise all your doing is political masterbation, it makes you feel good, be doesn't get anything done.

14
posted on 01/15/2004 8:32:57 AM PST
by Valin
(We make a living by what we get, we make a life by what we give.)

Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.